In this modern era, some individuals claim that funding arts seminars should be the government’s responsibility, while others argue that corporations or the pupil's family had better be in charge of it. From my point of view, it is necessary for the authority to fund those lessons relevant to art.
To begin with, the money paid on such courses from personal sources could be beneficial. First and foremost, if families pay for the mentioned seminars, the government would be able to focus on enhancing other aspects. This is because it can reduce the amount of invested money that the authority would be responsible for lessons, hence they can spend on others such as infrastructure, allowing them to boost the quality of schools. Additionally, this would be a merit for not only the government, but also the students since they could acquire a high-quality education. For instance, in Japan, parents are in charge of financing for courses of performing arts, as a result, the government has the responsibility of increasing the qualifications of schools, as well as providing the latest technology in classes, specifically screens which help students to show their work on projects to the class.
However, I believe that the government should sponsor art lessons for two reasons. To be more specific, if the government does not pay for those arts courses, parents may have burdens since they have to not only spend money on their life, but also the expenditure on art, which could lead them to financial problems. Given the reason, a few families may be underprivileged, thus, they could be incapable of funding arts classes. For example, a few students have to quit school due to the fact that their family does not pay for the school tuition fee sufficiently. Furthermore, since music or art could not be the interest of the majority of students, along with the fact that pupils rarely choose singers as well as artists to be their future careers, money of businesses or families should not be wasted in this field. Research has shown that only 1,2% of pupils want to work in art-related professions, compared to 30,3% of engineers or scientists.
In conclusion, although pupils’ family spending money for art lessons in class could lead the students to obtain better education, I believe that this fee should be paid by the government, which can support the underprivileged family in terms of finance.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 158, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'pupils'' or 'pupil's'?
Suggestion: pupils'; pupil's
...e others argue that corporations or the pupils family had better be in charge of it. F...
^^^^^^
Line 2, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...to fund those lessons relevant to art. To begin with, the money paid on such co...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...w their work on projects to the class. However, I believe that the government...
^^^^^^^
Line 6, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...d to 30,3% of engineers or scientists. In conclusion, although pupils’ family s...
^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, furthermore, hence, however, if, may, so, thus, well, while, for example, for instance, in conclusion, such as, as a result, as well as, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 16.0 13.1623246493 122% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 18.0 7.85571142285 229% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 7.0 10.4138276553 67% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 7.30460921844 151% => OK
Pronoun: 31.0 24.0651302605 129% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 55.0 41.998997996 131% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 8.3376753507 132% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2024.0 1615.20841683 125% => OK
No of words: 401.0 315.596192385 127% => OK
Chars per words: 5.04738154613 5.12529762239 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.47492842339 4.20363070211 106% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.92976385937 2.80592935109 104% => OK
Unique words: 199.0 176.041082164 113% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.496259351621 0.561755894193 88% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 602.1 506.74238477 119% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.60771543086 93% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 5.43587174349 110% => OK
Article: 5.0 2.52805611222 198% => OK
Subordination: 7.0 2.10420841683 333% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 0.809619238477 247% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 8.0 4.76152304609 168% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 16.0721442886 87% => OK
Sentence length: 28.0 20.2975951904 138% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 73.3543259996 49.4020404114 148% => OK
Chars per sentence: 144.571428571 106.682146367 136% => OK
Words per sentence: 28.6428571429 20.7667163134 138% => OK
Discourse Markers: 12.0 7.06120827912 170% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 5.01903807615 80% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 8.67935871743 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 3.9879759519 75% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 3.4128256513 29% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.256074233595 0.244688304435 105% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.101404697909 0.084324248473 120% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0632947184186 0.0667982634062 95% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.182047910357 0.151304729494 120% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0498860505001 0.056905535591 88% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.7 13.0946893788 128% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 51.52 50.2224549098 103% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.0 11.3001002004 115% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.6 12.4159519038 101% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.84 8.58950901804 103% => OK
difficult_words: 97.0 78.4519038076 124% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 9.78957915832 117% => OK
gunning_fog: 13.2 10.1190380762 130% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 10.7795591182 121% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 73.0337078652 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 6.5 Out of 9
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.